Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: Application of James BRINSON, Petitioner, For a Judgment, etc., v. Howard SAFIR, as Police Commissioner of the City of New York, et al., Respondents.
Determination of respondent Police Commissioner, dated January 16, 1997, dismissing petitioner from the New York City Police Department, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, New York County [Ronald Zweibel, J.], entered September 8, 1997), unanimously dismissed, without costs.
Accepting respondents' credibility determinations (see, Matter of Berenhaus v. Ward, 70 N.Y.2d 436, 443-444, 522 N.Y.S.2d 478, 517 N.E.2d 193), the record provides substantial evidence that petitioner knowingly and wrongfully associated with persons known to be engaged in criminal activity. Respondents properly accepted the hearsay statements of two informants, whose reliability was corroborated by police surveillance observations and investigation (see, Matter of Perez v. Ward, 69 N.Y.2d 840, 514 N.Y.S.2d 703, 507 N.E.2d 296).
The record also supports the determination that there was reasonable suspicion to order petitioner to undergo drug testing (id.), based on the corroborated information supplied by the informants, as well as on police surveillance observations.
The use of hair analysis drug testing has been held to be reliable by this Court (see, Matter of Brown v. City of New York, 250 A.D.2d 546, 673 N.Y.S.2d 643, lv. denied 92 N.Y.2d 810, 680 N.Y.S.2d 54, 702 N.E.2d 839). The record supports the finding that neither a mistake in transcribing the subject identification number nor the improper placement of test tubes in the centrifuge (which resulted in retesting), in any way affected the accuracy of the test results (see, Matter of Allen v. Police Dept., 240 A.D.2d 229, 658 N.Y.S.2d 610), and there is otherwise no basis in the record to disturb respondents' determination regarding the accuracy of the tests performed (see, Matter of Bonilla v. Kelly, 213 A.D.2d 264, 624 N.Y.S.2d 22).
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: November 24, 1998
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)